Podcasts about Feminist movement

Yesterday, the self-styled San Francisco “progressive” Joan Williams was on the show arguing that Democrats need to relearn the language of the American working class. But, as some of you have noted, Williams seems oblivious to the fact that politics is about more than simply aping other people's language. What you say matters, and the language of American working class, like all industrial working classes, is rooted in a critique of capitalism. She should probably read the New Yorker staff writer John Cassidy's excellent new book, Capitalism and its Critics, which traces capitalism's evolution and criticism from the East India Company through modern times. He defines capitalism as production for profit by privately-owned companies in markets, encompassing various forms from Chinese state capitalism to hyper-globalization. The book examines capitalism's most articulate critics including the Luddites, Marx, Engels, Thomas Carlisle, Adam Smith, Rosa Luxemburg, Keynes & Hayek, and contemporary figures like Sylvia Federici and Thomas Piketty. Cassidy explores how major economists were often critics of their era's dominant capitalist model, and untangles capitalism's complicated relationship with colonialism, slavery and AI which he regards as a potentially unprecedented economic disruption. This should be essential listening for all Democrats seeking to reinvent a post Biden-Harris party and message. 5 key takeaways* Capitalism has many forms - From Chinese state capitalism to Keynesian managed capitalism to hyper-globalization, all fitting the basic definition of production for profit by privately-owned companies in markets.* Great economists are typically critics - Smith criticized mercantile capitalism, Keynes critiqued laissez-faire capitalism, and Hayek/Friedman opposed managed capitalism. Each generation's leading economists challenge their era's dominant model.* Modern corporate structure has deep roots - The East India Company was essentially a modern multinational corporation with headquarters, board of directors, stockholders, and even a private army - showing capitalism's organizational continuity across centuries.* Capitalism is intertwined with colonialism and slavery - Industrial capitalism was built on pre-existing colonial and slave systems, particularly through the cotton industry and plantation economies.* AI represents a potentially unprecedented disruption - Unlike previous technological waves, AI may substitute rather than complement human labor on a massive scale, potentially creating political backlash exceeding even the "China shock" that contributed to Trump's rise.Keen On America is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. Full TranscriptAndrew Keen: Hello, everybody. A couple of days ago, we did a show with Joan Williams. She has a new book out, "Outclassed: How the Left Lost the Working Class and How to Win Them Back." A book about language, about how to talk to the American working class. She also had a piece in Jacobin Magazine, an anti-capitalist magazine, about how the left needs to speak to what she calls average American values. We talked, of course, about Bernie Sanders and AOC and their language of fighting oligarchy, and the New York Times followed that up with "The Enduring Power of Anti-Capitalism in American Politics."But of course, that brings the question: what exactly is capitalism? I did a little bit of research. We can find definitions of capitalism from AI, from Wikipedia, even from online dictionaries, but I thought we might do a little better than relying on Wikipedia and come to a man who's given capitalism and its critics a great deal of thought. John Cassidy is well known as a staff writer at The New Yorker. He's the author of a wonderful book, the best book, actually, on the dot-com insanity. And his new book, "Capitalism and its Critics," is out this week. John, congratulations on the book.So I've got to be a bit of a schoolmaster with you, John, and get some definitions first. What exactly is capitalism before we get to criticism of it?John Cassidy: Yeah, I mean, it's a very good question, Andrew. Obviously, through the decades, even the centuries, there have been many different definitions of the term capitalism and there are different types of capitalism. To not be sort of too ideological about it, the working definition I use is basically production for profit—that could be production of goods or mostly in the new and, you know, in today's economy, production of services—for profit by companies which are privately owned in markets. That's a very sort of all-encompassing definition.Within that, you can have all sorts of different types of capitalism. You can have Chinese state capitalism, you can have the old mercantilism, which industrial capitalism came after, which Trump seems to be trying to resurrect. You can have Keynesian managed capitalism that we had for 30 or 40 years after the Second World War, which I grew up in in the UK. Or you can have sort of hyper-globalization, hyper-capitalism that we've tried for the last 30 years. There are all those different varieties of capitalism consistent with a basic definition, I think.Andrew Keen: That keeps you busy, John. I know you started this project, which is a big book and it's a wonderful book. I read it. I don't always read all the books I have on the show, but I read from cover to cover full of remarkable stories of the critics of capitalism. You note in the beginning that you began this in 2016 with the beginnings of Trump. What was it about the 2016 election that triggered a book about capitalism and its critics?John Cassidy: Well, I was reporting on it at the time for The New Yorker and it struck me—I covered, I basically covered the economy in various forms for various publications since the late 80s, early 90s. In fact, one of my first big stories was the stock market crash of '87. So yes, I am that old. But it seemed to me in 2016 when you had Bernie Sanders running from the left and Trump running from the right, but both in some way offering very sort of similar critiques of capitalism. People forget that Trump in 2016 actually was running from the left of the Republican Party. He was attacking big business. He was attacking Wall Street. He doesn't do that these days very much, but at the time he was very much posing as the sort of outsider here to protect the interests of the average working man.And it seemed to me that when you had this sort of pincer movement against the then ruling model, this wasn't just a one-off. It seemed to me it was a sort of an emerging crisis of legitimacy for the system. And I thought there could be a good book written about how we got to here. And originally I thought it would be a relatively short book just based on the last sort of 20 or 30 years since the collapse of the Cold War and the sort of triumphalism of the early 90s.But as I got into it more and more, I realized that so many of the issues which had been raised, things like globalization, rising inequality, monopoly power, exploitation, even pollution and climate change, these issues go back to the very start of the capitalist system or the industrial capitalist system back in sort of late 18th century, early 19th century Britain. So I thought, in the end, I thought, you know what, let's just do the whole thing soup to nuts through the eyes of the critics.There have obviously been many, many histories of capitalism written. I thought that an original way to do it, or hopefully original, would be to do a sort of a narrative through the lives and the critiques of the critics of various stages. So that's, I hope, what sets it apart from other books on the subject, and also provides a sort of narrative frame because, you know, I am a New Yorker writer, I realize if you want people to read things, you've got to make it readable. Easiest way to make things readable is to center them around people. People love reading about other people. So that's sort of the narrative frame. I start off with a whistleblower from the East India Company back in the—Andrew Keen: Yeah, I want to come to that. But before, John, my sense is that to simplify what you're saying, this is a labor of love. You're originally from Leeds, the heart of Yorkshire, the center of the very industrial revolution, the first industrial revolution where, in your historical analysis, capitalism was born. Is it a labor of love? What's your family relationship with capitalism? How long was the family in Leeds?John Cassidy: Right, I mean that's a very good question. It is a labor of love in a way, but it's not—our family doesn't go—I'm from an Irish family, family of Irish immigrants who moved to England in the 1940s and 1950s. So my father actually did start working in a big mill, the Kirkstall Forge in Leeds, which is a big steel mill, and he left after seeing one of his co-workers have his arms chopped off in one of the machinery, so he decided it wasn't for him and he spent his life working in the construction industry, which was dominated by immigrants as it is here now.So I don't have a—it's not like I go back to sort of the start of the industrial revolution, but I did grow up in the middle of Leeds, very working class, very industrial neighborhood. And what a sort of irony is, I'll point out, I used to, when I was a kid, I used to play golf on a municipal golf course called Gotts Park in Leeds, which—you know, most golf courses in America are sort of in the affluent suburbs, country clubs. This was right in the middle of Armley in Leeds, which is where the Victorian jail is and a very rough neighborhood. There's a small bit of land which they built a golf course on. It turns out it was named after one of the very first industrialists, Benjamin Gott, who was a wool and textile industrialist, and who played a part in the Luddite movement, which I mention.So it turns out, I was there when I was 11 or 12, just learning how to play golf on this scrappy golf course. And here I am, 50 years later, writing about Benjamin Gott at the start of the Industrial Revolution. So yeah, no, sure. I think it speaks to me in a way that perhaps it wouldn't to somebody else from a different background.Andrew Keen: We did a show with William Dalrymple, actually, a couple of years ago. He's been on actually since, the Anglo or Scottish Indian historian. His book on the East India Company, "The Anarchy," is a classic. You begin in some ways your history of capitalism with the East India Company. What was it about the East India Company, John, that makes it different from other for-profit organizations in economic, Western economic history?John Cassidy: I mean, I read that. It's a great book, by the way. That was actually quoted in my chapter on these. Yeah, I remember. I mean, the reason I focused on it was for two reasons. Number one, I was looking for a start, a narrative start to the book. And it seemed to me, you know, the obvious place to start is with the start of the industrial revolution. If you look at economics history textbooks, that's where they always start with Arkwright and all the inventors, you know, who were the sort of techno-entrepreneurs of their time, the sort of British Silicon Valley, if you could think of it as, in Lancashire and Derbyshire in the late 18th century.So I knew I had to sort of start there in some way, but I thought that's a bit pat. Is there another way into it? And it turns out that in 1772 in England, there was a huge bailout of the East India Company, very much like the sort of 2008, 2009 bailout of Wall Street. The company got into trouble. So I thought, you know, maybe there's something there. And I eventually found this guy, William Bolts, who worked for the East India Company, turned into a whistleblower after he was fired for finagling in India like lots of the people who worked for the company did.So that gave me two things. Number one, it gave me—you know, I'm a writer, so it gave me something to focus on a narrative. His personal history is very interesting. But number two, it gave me a sort of foundation because industrial capitalism didn't come from nowhere. You know, it was built on top of a pre-existing form of capitalism, which we now call mercantile capitalism, which was very protectionist, which speaks to us now. But also it had these big monopolistic multinational companies.The East India Company, in some ways, was a very modern corporation. It had a headquarters in Leadenhall Street in the city of London. It had a board of directors, it had stockholders, the company sent out very detailed instructions to the people in the field in India and Indonesia and Malaysia who were traders who bought things from the locals there, brought them back to England on their company ships. They had a company army even to enforce—to protect their operations there. It was an incredible multinational corporation.So that was also, I think, fascinating because it showed that even in the pre-existing system, you know, big corporations existed, there were monopolies, they had royal monopolies given—first the East India Company got one from Queen Elizabeth. But in some ways, they were very similar to modern monopolistic corporations. And they had some of the problems we've seen with modern monopolistic corporations, the way they acted. And Bolts was the sort of first corporate whistleblower, I thought. Yeah, that was a way of sort of getting into the story, I think. Hopefully, you know, it's just a good read, I think.William Bolts's story because he was—he came from nowhere, he was Dutch, he wasn't even English and he joined the company as a sort of impoverished young man, went to India like a lot of English minor aristocrats did to sort of make your fortune. The way the company worked, you had to sort of work on company time and make as much money as you could for the company, but then in your spare time you're allowed to trade for yourself. So a lot of the—without getting into too much detail, but you know, English aristocracy was based on—you know, the eldest child inherits everything, so if you were the younger brother of the Duke of Norfolk, you actually didn't inherit anything. So all of these minor aristocrats, so major aristocrats, but who weren't first born, joined the East India Company, went out to India and made a fortune, and then came back and built huge houses. Lots of the great manor houses in southern England were built by people from the East India Company and they were known as Nabobs, which is an Indian term. So they were the sort of, you know, billionaires of their time, and it was based on—as I say, it wasn't based on industrial capitalism, it was based on mercantile capitalism.Andrew Keen: Yeah, the beginning of the book, which focuses on Bolts and the East India Company, brings to mind for me two things. Firstly, the intimacy of modern capitalism, modern industrial capitalism with colonialism and of course slavery—lots of books have been written on that. Touch on this and also the relationship between the birth of capitalism and the birth of liberalism or democracy. John Stuart Mill, of course, the father in many ways of Western democracy. His day job, ironically enough, or perhaps not ironically, was at the East India Company. So how do those two things connect, or is it just coincidental?John Cassidy: Well, I don't think it is entirely coincidental, I mean, J.S. Mill—his father, James Mill, was also a well-known philosopher in the sort of, obviously, in the earlier generation, earlier than him. And he actually wrote the official history of the East India Company. And I think they gave his son, the sort of brilliant protégé, J.S. Mill, a job as largely as a sort of sinecure, I think. But he did go in and work there in the offices three or four days a week.But I think it does show how sort of integral—the sort of—as you say, the inheritor and the servant in Britain, particularly, of colonial capitalism was. So the East India Company was, you know, it was in decline by that stage in the middle of the 19th century, but it didn't actually give up its monopoly. It wasn't forced to give up its monopoly on the Indian trade until 1857, after, you know, some notorious massacres and there was a sort of public outcry.So yeah, no, that's—it's very interesting that the British—it's sort of unique to Britain in a way, but it's interesting that industrial capitalism arose alongside this pre-existing capitalist structure and somebody like Mill is a sort of paradoxical figure because actually he was quite critical of aspects of industrial capitalism and supported sort of taxes on the rich, even though he's known as the great, you know, one of the great apostles of the free market and free market liberalism. And his day job, as you say, he was working for the East India Company.Andrew Keen: What about the relationship between the birth of industrial capitalism, colonialism and slavery? Those are big questions and I know you deal with them in some—John Cassidy: I think you can't just write an economic history of capitalism now just starting with the cotton industry and say, you know, it was all about—it was all about just technical progress and gadgets, etc. It was built on a sort of pre-existing system which was colonial and, you know, the slave trade was a central element of that. Now, as you say, there have been lots and lots of books written about it, the whole 1619 project got an incredible amount of attention a few years ago. So I didn't really want to rehash all that, but I did want to acknowledge the sort of role of slavery, especially in the rise of the cotton industry because of course, a lot of the raw cotton was grown in the plantations in the American South.So the way I actually ended up doing that was by writing a chapter about Eric Williams, a Trinidadian writer who ended up as the Prime Minister of Trinidad when it became independent in the 1960s. But when he was younger, he wrote a book which is now regarded as a classic. He went to Oxford to do a PhD, won a scholarship. He was very smart. I won a sort of Oxford scholarship myself but 50 years before that, he came across the Atlantic and did an undergraduate degree in history and then did a PhD there and his PhD thesis was on slavery and capitalism.And at the time, in the 1930s, the link really wasn't acknowledged. You could read any sort of standard economic history written by British historians, and they completely ignored that. He made the argument that, you know, slavery was integral to the rise of capitalism and he basically started an argument which has been raging ever since the 1930s and, you know, if you want to study economic history now you have to sort of—you know, have to have to address that. And the way I thought, even though the—it's called the Williams thesis is very famous. I don't think many people knew much about where it came from. So I thought I'd do a chapter on—Andrew Keen: Yeah, that chapter is excellent. You mentioned earlier the Luddites, you're from Yorkshire where Luddism in some ways was born. One of the early chapters is on the Luddites. We did a show with Brian Merchant, his book, "Blood in the Machine," has done very well, I'm sure you're familiar with it. I always understood the Luddites as being against industrialization, against the machine, as opposed to being against capitalism. But did those two things get muddled together in the history of the Luddites?John Cassidy: I think they did. I mean, you know, Luddites, when we grew up, I mean you're English too, you know to be called a Luddite was a term of abuse, right? You know, you were sort of antediluvian, anti-technology, you're stupid. It was only, I think, with the sort of computer revolution, the tech revolution of the last 30, 40 years and the sort of disruptions it's caused, that people have started to look back at the Luddites and say, perhaps they had a point.For them, they were basically pre-industrial capitalism artisans. They worked for profit-making concerns, small workshops. Some of them worked for themselves, so they were sort of sole proprietor capitalists. Or they worked in small venues, but the rise of industrial capitalism, factory capitalism or whatever, basically took away their livelihoods progressively. So they associated capitalism with new technology. In their minds it was the same. But their argument wasn't really a technological one or even an economic one, it was more a moral one. They basically made the moral argument that capitalists shouldn't have the right to just take away their livelihoods with no sort of recompense for them.At the time they didn't have any parliamentary representation. You know, they weren't revolutionaries. The first thing they did was create petitions to try and get parliament to step in, sort of introduce some regulation here. They got turned down repeatedly by the sort of—even though it was a very aristocratic parliament, places like Manchester and Leeds didn't have any representation at all. So it was only after that that they sort of turned violent and started, you know, smashing machines and machines, I think, were sort of symbols of the system, which they saw as morally unjust.And I think that's sort of what—obviously, there's, you know, a lot of technological disruption now, so we can, especially as it starts to come for the educated cognitive class, we can sort of sympathize with them more. But I think the sort of moral critique that there's this, you know, underneath the sort of great creativity and economic growth that capitalism produces, there is also a lot of destruction and a lot of victims. And I think that message, you know, is becoming a lot more—that's why I think why they've been rediscovered in the last five or ten years and I'm one of the people I guess contributing to that rediscovery.Andrew Keen: There's obviously many critiques of capitalism politically. I want to come to Marx in a second, but your chapter, I thought, on Thomas Carlyle and this nostalgic conservatism was very important and there are other conservatives as well. John, do you think that—and you mentioned Trump earlier, who is essentially a nostalgist for a—I don't know, some sort of bizarre pre-capitalist age in America. Is there something particularly powerful about the anti-capitalism of romantics like Carlyle, 19th century Englishman, there were many others of course.John Cassidy: Well, I think so. I mean, I think what is—conservatism, when we were young anyway, was associated with Thatcherism and Reaganism, which, you know, lionized the free market and free market capitalism and was a reaction against the pre-existing form of capitalism, Keynesian capitalism of the sort of 40s to the 80s. But I think what got lost in that era was the fact that there have always been—you've got Hayek up there, obviously—Andrew Keen: And then Keynes and Hayek, the two—John Cassidy: Right, it goes to the end of that. They had a great debate in the 1930s about these issues. But Hayek really wasn't a conservative person, and neither was Milton Friedman. They were sort of free market revolutionaries, really, that you'd let the market rip and it does good things. And I think that that sort of a view, you know, it just became very powerful. But we sort of lost sight of the fact that there was also a much older tradition of sort of suspicion of radical changes of any type. And that was what conservatism was about to some extent. If you think about Baldwin in Britain, for example.And there was a sort of—during the Industrial Revolution, some of the strongest supporters of factory acts to reduce hours and hourly wages for women and kids were actually conservatives, Tories, as they were called at the time, like Ashley. That tradition, Carlyle was a sort of extreme representative of that. I mean, Carlyle was a sort of proto-fascist, let's not romanticize him, he lionized strongmen, Frederick the Great, and he didn't really believe in democracy. But he also had—he was appalled by the sort of, you know, the—like, what's the phrase I'm looking for? The sort of destructive aspects of industrial capitalism, both on the workers, you know, he said it was a dehumanizing system, sounded like Marx in some ways. That it dehumanized the workers, but also it destroyed the environment.He was an early environmentalist. He venerated the environment, was actually very strongly linked to the transcendentalists in America, people like Thoreau, who went to visit him when he visited Britain and he saw the sort of destructive impact that capitalism was having locally in places like Manchester, which were filthy with filthy rivers, etc. So he just saw the whole system as sort of morally bankrupt and he was a great writer, Carlyle, whatever you think of him. Great user of language, so he has these great ringing phrases like, you know, the cash nexus or calling it the Gospel of Mammonism, the shabbiest gospel ever preached under the sun was industrial capitalism.So, again, you know, that's a sort of paradoxical thing, because I think for so long conservatism was associated with, you know, with support for the free market and still is in most of the Republican Party, but then along comes Trump and sort of conquers the party with a, you know, more skeptical, as you say, romantic, not really based on any reality, but a sort of romantic view that America can stand by itself in the world. I mean, I see Trump actually as a sort of an effort to sort of throw back to mercantile capitalism in a way. You know, which was not just pre-industrial, but was also pre-democracy, run by monarchs, which I'm sure appeals to him, and it was based on, you know, large—there were large tariffs. You couldn't import things in the UK. If you want to import anything to the UK, you have to send it on a British ship because of the navigation laws. It was a very protectionist system and it's actually, you know, as I said, had a lot of parallels with what Trump's trying to do or tries to do until he backs off.Andrew Keen: You cheat a little bit in the book in the sense that you—everyone has their own chapter. We'll talk a little bit about Hayek and Smith and Lenin and Friedman. You do have one chapter on Marx, but you also have a chapter on Engels. So you kind of cheat. You combine the two. Is it possible, though, to do—and you've just written this book, so you know this as well as anyone. How do you write a book about capitalism and its critics and only really give one chapter to Marx, who is so dominant? I mean, you've got lots of Marxists in the book, including Lenin and Luxemburg. How fundamental is Marx to a criticism of capitalism? Is most criticism, especially from the left, from progressives, is it really just all a footnote to Marx?John Cassidy: I wouldn't go that far, but I think obviously on the left he is the central figure. But there's an element of sort of trying to rebuild Engels a bit in this. I mean, I think of Engels and Marx—I mean obviously Marx wrote the great classic "Capital," etc. But in the 1840s, when they both started writing about capitalism, Engels was sort of ahead of Marx in some ways. I mean, the sort of materialist concept, the idea that economics rules everything, Engels actually was the first one to come up with that in an essay in the 1840s which Marx then published in one of his—in the German newspaper he worked for at the time, radical newspaper, and he acknowledged openly that that was really what got him thinking seriously about economics, and even in the late—in 20, 25 years later when he wrote "Capital," all three volumes of it and the Grundrisse, just these enormous outpourings of analysis on capitalism.He acknowledged Engels's role in that and obviously Engels wrote the first draft of the Communist Manifesto in 1848 too, which Marx then topped and tailed and—he was a better writer obviously, Marx, and he gave it the dramatic language that we all know it for. So I think Engels and Marx together obviously are the central sort of figures in the sort of left-wing critique. But they didn't start out like that. I mean, they were very obscure, you've got to remember.You know, they were—when they were writing, Marx was writing "Capital" in London, it never even got published in English for another 20 years. It was just published in German. He was basically an expat. He had been thrown out of Germany, he had been thrown out of France, so England was last resort and the British didn't consider him a threat so they were happy to let him and the rest of the German sort of left in there. I think it became—it became the sort of epochal figure after his death really, I think, when he was picked up by the left-wing parties, which are especially the SPD in Germany, which was the first sort of socialist mass party and was officially Marxist until the First World War and there were great internal debates.And then of course, because Lenin and the Russians came out of that tradition too, Marxism then became the official doctrine of the Soviet Union when they adopted a version of it. And again there were massive internal arguments about what Marx really meant, and in fact, you know, one interpretation of the last 150 years of left-wing sort of intellectual development is as a sort of argument about what did Marx really mean and what are the important bits of it, what are the less essential bits of it. It's a bit like the "what did Keynes really mean" that you get in liberal circles.So yeah, Marx, obviously, this is basically an intellectual history of critiques of capitalism. In that frame, he is absolutely a central figure. Why didn't I give him more space than a chapter and a chapter and a half with Engels? There have been a million books written about Marx. I mean, it's not that—it's not that he's an unknown figure. You know, there's a best-selling book written in Britain about 20 years ago about him and then I was quoting, in my biographical research, I relied on some more recent, more scholarly biographies. So he's an endlessly fascinating figure but I didn't want him to dominate the book so I gave him basically the same space as everybody else.Andrew Keen: You've got, as I said, you've got a chapter on Adam Smith who's often considered the father of economics. You've got a chapter on Keynes. You've got a chapter on Friedman. And you've got a chapter on Hayek, all the great modern economists. Is it possible, John, to be a distinguished economist one way or the other and not be a critic of capitalism?John Cassidy: Well, I don't—I mean, I think history would suggest that the greatest economists have been critics of capitalism in their own time. People would say to me, what the hell have you got Milton Friedman and Friedrich Hayek in a book about critics of capitalism? They were great exponents, defenders of capitalism. They loved the system. That is perfectly true. But in the 1930s, 40s, 50s, 60s, and 70s, middle of the 20th century, they were actually arch-critics of the ruling form of capitalism at the time, which was what I call managed capitalism. What some people call Keynesianism, what other people call European social democracy, whatever you call it, it was a model of a mixed economy in which the government played a large role both in propping up demand and in providing an extensive social safety net in the UK and providing public healthcare and public education. It was a sort of hybrid model.Most of the economy in terms of the businesses remained in private hands. So most production was capitalistic. It was a capitalist system. They didn't go to the Soviet model of nationalizing everything and Britain did nationalize some businesses, but most places didn't. The US of course didn't but it was a form of managed capitalism. And Hayek and Friedman were both great critics of that and wanted to sort of move back to 19th century laissez-faire model.Keynes was a—was actually a great, I view him anyway, as really a sort of late Victorian liberal and was trying to protect as much of the sort of J.S. Mill view of the world as he could, but he thought capitalism had one fatal flaw: that it tended to fall into recessions and then they can snowball and the whole system can collapse which is what had basically happened in the early 1930s until Keynesian policies were adopted. Keynes sort of differed from a lot of his followers—I have a chapter on Joan Robinson in there, who were pretty left-wing and wanted to sort of use Keynesianism as a way to shift the economy quite far to the left. Keynes didn't really believe in that. He has a famous quote that, you know, once you get to full employment, you can then rely on the free market to sort of take care of things. He was still a liberal at heart.Going back to Adam Smith, why is he in a book on criticism of capitalism? And again, it goes back to what I said at the beginning. He actually wrote "The Wealth of Nations"—he explains in the introduction—as a critique of mercantile capitalism. His argument was that he was a pro-free trader, pro-small business, free enterprise. His argument was if you get the government out of the way, we don't need these government-sponsored monopolies like the East India Company. If you just rely on the market, the sort of market forces and competition will produce a good outcome. So then he was seen as a great—you know, he is then seen as the apostle of free market capitalism. I mean when I started as a young reporter, when I used to report in Washington, all the conservatives used to wear Adam Smith badges. You don't see Donald Trump wearing an Adam Smith badge, but that was the case.He was also—the other aspect of Smith, which I highlight, which is not often remarked on—he's also a critic of big business. He has a famous section where he discusses the sort of tendency of any group of more than three businessmen when they get together to try and raise prices and conspire against consumers. And he was very suspicious of, as I say, large companies, monopolies. I think if Adam Smith existed today, I mean, I think he would be a big supporter of Lina Khan and the sort of antitrust movement, he would say capitalism is great as long as you have competition, but if you don't have competition it becomes, you know, exploitative.Andrew Keen: Yeah, if Smith came back to live today, you have a chapter on Thomas Piketty, maybe he may not be French, but he may be taking that position about how the rich benefit from the structure of investment. Piketty's core—I've never had Piketty on the show, but I've had some of his followers like Emmanuel Saez from Berkeley. Yeah. How powerful is Piketty's critique of capitalism within the context of the classical economic analysis from Hayek and Friedman? Yeah, it's a very good question.John Cassidy: It's a very good question. I mean, he's a very paradoxical figure, Piketty, in that he obviously shot to world fame and stardom with his book on capital in the 21st century, which in some ways he obviously used the capital as a way of linking himself to Marx, even though he said he never read Marx. But he was basically making the same argument that if you leave capitalism unrestrained and don't do anything about monopolies etc. or wealth, you're going to get massive inequality and he—I think his great contribution, Piketty and the school of people, one of them you mentioned, around him was we sort of had a vague idea that inequality was going up and that, you know, wages were stagnating, etc.What he and his colleagues did is they produced these sort of scientific empirical studies showing in very simple to understand terms how the sort of share of income and wealth of the top 10 percent, the top 5 percent, the top 1 percent and the top 0.1 percent basically skyrocketed from the 1970s to about 2010. And it was, you know, he was an MIT PhD. Saez, who you mentioned, is a Berkeley professor. They were schooled in neoclassical economics at Harvard and MIT and places like that. So the right couldn't dismiss them as sort of, you know, lefties or Trots or whatever who're just sort of making this stuff up. They had to acknowledge that this was actually an empirical reality.I think it did change the whole basis of the debate and it was sort of part of this reaction against capitalism in the 2010s. You know it was obviously linked to the sort of Sanders and the Occupy Wall Street movement at the time. It came out of the—you know, the financial crisis as well when Wall Street disgraced itself. I mean, I wrote a previous book on all that, but people have sort of, I think, forgotten the great reaction against that a decade ago, which I think even Trump sort of exploited, as I say, by using anti-banker rhetoric at the time.So, Piketty was a great figure, I think, from, you know, I was thinking, who are the most influential critics of capitalism in the 21st century? And I think you'd have to put him up there on the list. I'm not saying he's the only one or the most eminent one. But I think he is a central figure. Now, of course, you'd think, well, this is a really powerful critic of capitalism, and nobody's going to pick up, and Bernie's going to take off and everything. But here we are a decade later now. It seems to be what the backlash has produced is a swing to the right, not a swing to the left. So that's, again, a sort of paradox.Andrew Keen: One person I didn't expect to come up in the book, John, and I was fascinated with this chapter, is Silvia Federici. I've tried to get her on the show. We've had some books about her writing and her kind of—I don't know, you treat her critique as a feminist one. The role of women. Why did you choose to write a chapter about Federici and that feminist critique of capitalism?John Cassidy: Right, right. Well, I don't think it was just feminist. I'll explain what I think it was. Two reasons. Number one, I wanted to get more women into the book. I mean, it's in some sense, it is a history of economics and economic critiques. And they are overwhelmingly written by men and women were sort of written out of the narrative of capitalism for a very long time. So I tried to include as many sort of women as actual thinkers as I could and I have a couple of early socialist feminist thinkers, Anna Wheeler and Flora Tristan and then I cover some of the—I cover Rosa Luxemburg as the great sort of tribune of the left revolutionary socialist, communist whatever you want to call it. Anti-capitalist I think is probably also important to note about. Yeah, and then I also have Joan Robinson, but I wanted somebody to do something in the modern era, and I thought Federici, in the world of the Wages for Housework movement, is very interesting from two perspectives.Number one, Federici herself is a Marxist, and I think she probably would still consider herself a revolutionary. She's based in New York, as you know now. She lived in New York for 50 years, but she came from—she's originally Italian and came out of the Italian left in the 1960s, which was very radical. Do you know her? Did you talk to her? I didn't talk to her on this. No, she—I basically relied on, there has been a lot of, as you say, there's been a lot of stuff written about her over the years. She's written, you know, she's given various long interviews and she's written a book herself, a version, a history of housework, so I figured it was all there and it was just a matter of pulling it together.But I think the critique, why the critique is interesting, most of the book is a sort of critique of how capitalism works, you know, in the production or you know, in factories or in offices or you know, wherever capitalist operations are working, but her critique is sort of domestic reproduction, as she calls it, the role of unpaid labor in supporting capitalism. I mean it goes back a long way actually. There was this moment, I sort of trace it back to the 1940s and 1950s when there were feminists in America who were demonstrating outside factories and making the point that you know, the factory workers and the operations of the factory, it couldn't—there's one of the famous sort of tire factory in California demonstrations where the women made the argument, look this factory can't continue to operate unless we feed and clothe the workers and provide the next generation of workers. You know, that's domestic reproduction. So their argument was that housework should be paid and Federici took that idea and a couple of her colleagues, she founded the—it's a global movement, but she founded the most famous branch in New York City in the 1970s. In Park Slope near where I live actually.And they were—you call it feminists, they were feminists in a way, but they were rejected by the sort of mainstream feminist movement, the sort of Gloria Steinems of the world, who Federici was very critical of because she said they ignored, they really just wanted to get women ahead in the sort of capitalist economy and they ignored the sort of underlying from her perspective, the underlying sort of illegitimacy and exploitation of that system. So they were never accepted as part of the feminist movement. They're to the left of the Feminist Movement.Andrew Keen: You mentioned Keynes, of course, so central in all this, particularly his analysis of the role of automation in capitalism. We did a show recently with Robert Skidelsky and I'm sure you're familiar—John Cassidy: Yeah, yeah, great, great biography of Keynes.Andrew Keen: Yeah, the great biographer of Keynes, whose latest book is "Mindless: The Human Condition in the Age of AI." You yourself wrote a brilliant book on the last tech mania and dot-com capitalism. I used it in a lot of my writing and books. What's your analysis of AI in this latest mania and the role generally of manias in the history of capitalism and indeed in critiquing capitalism? Is AI just the next chapter of the dot-com boom?John Cassidy: I think it's a very deep question. I think I'd give two answers to it. In one sense it is just the latest mania the way—I mean, the way capitalism works is we have these, I go back to Kondratiev, one of my Russian economists who ended up being killed by Stalin. He was the sort of inventor of the long wave theory of capitalism. We have these short waves where you have sort of booms and busts driven by finance and debt etc. But we also have long waves driven by technology.And obviously, in the last 40, 50 years, the two big ones are the original deployment of the internet and microchip technology in the sort of 80s and 90s culminating in the dot-com boom of the late 90s, which as you say, I wrote about. Thanks very much for your kind comments on the book. If you just sort of compare it from a financial basis I think they are very similar just in terms of the sort of role of hype from Wall Street in hyping up these companies. The sort of FOMO aspect of it among investors that they you know, you can't miss out. So just buy the companies blindly. And the sort of lionization in the press and the media of, you know, of AI as the sort of great wave of the future.So if you take a sort of skeptical market based approach, I would say, yeah, this is just another sort of another mania which will eventually burst and it looked like it had burst for a few weeks when Trump put the tariffs up, now the market seemed to be recovering. But I think there is, there may be something new about it. I am not, I don't pretend to be a technical expert. I try to rely on the evidence of or the testimony of people who know the systems well and also economists who have studied it. It seems to me the closer you get to it the more alarming it is in terms of the potential shock value that there is there.I mean Trump and the sort of reaction to a larger extent can be traced back to the China shock where we had this global shock to American manufacturing and sort of hollowed out a lot of the industrial areas much of it, like industrial Britain was hollowed out in the 80s. If you, you know, even people like Altman and Elon Musk, they seem to think that this is going to be on a much larger scale than that and will basically, you know, get rid of the professions as they exist. Which would be a huge, huge shock. And I think a lot of the economists who studied this, who four or five years ago were relatively optimistic, people like Daron Acemoglu, David Autor—Andrew Keen: Simon Johnson, of course, who just won the Nobel Prize, and he's from England.John Cassidy: Simon, I did an event with Simon earlier this week. You know they've studied this a lot more closely than I have but I do interview them and I think five, six years ago they were sort of optimistic that you know this could just be a new steam engine or could be a microchip which would lead to sort of a lot more growth, rising productivity, rising productivity is usually associated with rising wages so sure there'd be short-term costs but ultimately it would be a good thing. Now, I think if you speak to them, they see since the, you know, obviously, the OpenAI—the original launch and now there's just this huge arms race with no government involvement at all I think they're coming to the conclusion that rather than being developed to sort of complement human labor, all these systems are just being rushed out to substitute for human labor. And it's just going, if current trends persist, it's going to be a China shock on an even bigger scale.You know what is going to, if that, if they're right, that is going to produce some huge political backlash at some point, that's inevitable. So I know—the thing when the dot-com bubble burst, it didn't really have that much long-term impact on the economy. People lost the sort of fake money they thought they'd made. And then the companies, obviously some of the companies like Amazon and you know Google were real genuine profit-making companies and if you bought them early you made a fortune. But AI does seem a sort of bigger, scarier phenomenon to me. I don't know. I mean, you're close to it. What do you think?Andrew Keen: Well, I'm waiting for a book, John, from you. I think you can combine dot-com and capitalism and its critics. We need you probably to cover it—you know more about it than me. Final question, I mean, it's a wonderful book and we haven't even scratched the surface everyone needs to get it. I enjoyed the chapter, for example, on Karl Polanyi and so much more. I mean, it's a big book. But my final question, John, is do you have any regrets about anyone you left out? The one person I would have liked to have been included was Rawls because of his sort of treatment of capitalism and luck as a kind of casino. I'm not sure whether you gave any thought to Rawls, but is there someone in retrospect you should have had a chapter on that you left out?John Cassidy: There are lots of people I left out. I mean, that's the problem. I mean there have been hundreds and hundreds of critics of capitalism. Rawls, of course, incredibly influential and his idea of the sort of, you know, the veil of ignorance that you should judge things not knowing where you are in the income distribution and then—Andrew Keen: And it's luck. I mean the idea of some people get lucky and some people don't.John Cassidy: It is the luck of the draw, obviously, what card you pull. I think that is a very powerful critique, but I just—because I am more of an expert on economics, I tended to leave out philosophers and sociologists. I mean, you know, you could say, where's Max Weber? Where are the anarchists? You know, where's Emma Goldman? Where's John Kenneth Galbraith, the sort of great mid-century critic of American industrial capitalism? There's so many people that you could include. I mean, I could have written 10 volumes. In fact, I refer in the book to, you know, there's always been a problem. G.D.H. Cole, a famous English historian, wrote a history of socialism back in the 1960s and 70s. You know, just getting to 1850 took him six volumes. So, you've got to pick and choose, and I don't claim this is the history of capitalism and its critics. That would be a ridiculous claim to make. I just claim it's a history written by me, and hopefully the people are interested in it, and they're sufficiently diverse that you can address all the big questions.Andrew Keen: Well it's certainly incredibly timely. Capitalism and its critics—more and more of them. Sometimes they don't even describe themselves as critics of capitalism when they're talking about oligarchs or billionaires, they're really criticizing capitalism. A must read from one of America's leading journalists. And would you call yourself a critic of capitalism, John?John Cassidy: Yeah, I guess I am, to some extent, sure. I mean, I'm not a—you know, I'm not on the far left, but I'd say I'm a center-left critic of capitalism. Yes, definitely, that would be fair.Andrew Keen: And does the left need to learn? Does everyone on the left need to read the book and learn the language of anti-capitalism in a more coherent and honest way?John Cassidy: I hope so. I mean, obviously, I'd be talking my own book there, as they say, but I hope that people on the left, but not just people on the left. I really did try to sort of be fair to the sort of right-wing critiques as well. I included the Carlyle chapter particularly, obviously, but in the later chapters, I also sort of refer to this emerging critique on the right, the sort of economic nationalist critique. So hopefully, I think people on the right could read it to understand the critiques from the left, and people on the left could read it to understand some of the critiques on the right as well.Andrew Keen: Well, it's a lovely book. It's enormously erudite and simultaneously readable. Anyone who likes John Cassidy's work from The New Yorker will love it. Congratulations, John, on the new book, and I'd love to get you back on the show as anti-capitalism in America picks up steam and perhaps manifests itself in the 2028 election. Thank you so much.John Cassidy: Thanks very much for inviting me on, it was fun.Keen On America is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit keenon.substack.com/subscribe

Life Dynamics-Mark Crutcher: Episode 40 How The Feminist Movement Was Hijacked By Abortion Advocates by Priests for Life

Friday, November 29th, 2024Today, a special edition of the Daily Beans. I'll be going over David Corn's investigative reporting on Tulsi Gabbard, and a brief history of the Equal Rights Amendment from American Progress.Thank you BeamDreamThere's never been a better time to finally try Dream! Shop their Black Friday sale and get up to 50% off when you visit ShopBeam.com/DAILYBEANS and use the code DAILYBEANS at checkout! Stories:Tulsi Gabbard Keeps Starting Up PACs. Where Is the Money Going? (David Corn | Mother Jones)What Comes Next for the Equal Rights Amendment? (Isabela Salas-Betsch and Kate Kelly | The Center for American Progress)Guest: John Fugelsanghttps://www.johnfugelsang.com/tmehttps://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-john-fugelsang-podcast/id1464094232The Sexy Liberal Save The World Comedy Tourhttps://sexyliberal.com Check out other MSW Media podcastshttps://mswmedia.com/shows/Subscribe for free to MuellerSheWrote on Substackhttps://muellershewrote.substack.comFollow AG and Dana on Social MediaDr. Allison Gill Substack|Muellershewrote, Twitter|@MuellerSheWrote, Threads|@muellershewrote, TikTok|@muellershewrote, IG|muellershewroteDana GoldbergTwitter|@DGComedy, IG|dgcomedy, facebook|dgcomedy, IG|dgcomedy, danagoldberg.comHave some good news; a confession; or a correction to share?Good News & Confessions - The Daily Beanshttps://www.dailybeanspod.com/confessional/ Listener Survey:http://survey.podtrac.com/start-survey.aspx?pubid=BffJOlI7qQcF&ver=shortFollow the Podcast on Apple:The Daily Beans on Apple PodcastsWant to support the show and get it ad-free and early?Supercasthttps://dailybeans.supercast.com/Patreon https://patreon.com/thedailybeansOr subscribe on Apple Podcasts with our affiliate linkThe Daily Beans on Apple Podcasts

Ace interviewer Elodie Saint-Louis sits down with Lili Anolik to discuss Anolik's new book Didion & Babitz. Anolik talks about the complicated relationship between authors Joan Didion and Eve Babitz, their unique perspectives on the Feminist Movement, and how they were each consumed by and motivated each other. Anolik also tells the fascinating story of how she discovered the complexity of this relationship to begin with. If you're a fan of either author, this isn't an episode to miss! Produced by Elodie Saint-Louis and Mick Kowaleski Music by Duck! The Piano Wire

Holmberg's Morning Sickness - Wednesday November 13, 2024 Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Holmberg's Morning Sickness - Wednesday November 13, 2024 Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Donald Trump has (once again) won the United States presidential election — despite 34 felony counts, 1 conviction, 2 cases pending, 2 impeachments, and 6 bankruptcies.  That means a Republican White House, a Republican leaning Supreme Court, a Republican majority in the Senate, and a likely Republican House of Representatives. With Republicans at the helm, so much is at stake for our democracy — particularly for women and the childfree.And that's where the 4B movement comes in. In this episode we'll cover the 4B movement, what it is, how it's growing into a 5B, 6B, and 7B movement, why childfree women are embracing it, and what it means for our future. Read the book Flowers of Fire: The Inside Story of South Korea's Feminist Movement and What It Means for Women's Rights WorldwideRead an interview with Nayoung Kim, one of Korea's 4B activists, and watch this YouTube interview from Asian Boss. Buy your own Dinky x Cheese Grotto pairing box! Use DINKYPOD10 at checkout. DINKY MERCH IS NOW LIVE FOR THE HOLIDAYS!  Join the next Dinky trip: Adventures In Egypt With Erika Of DinkySupport this show. (We haven't launched the Patreon yet, lol) Wanna connect with us on social media? You can find us on Instagram and TikTok at @dinkypod.  If you have a question or comment, email us at dinky@dinkypod.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/dinky--5953015/support.

In this episode we feature two segments from recent CODEPINK webinars about putting our values into practice as anti-imperialist feminists. First, Danaka, Grace, and Jasmine of CODEPINK staff highlight the relational values we must embody as we build the world we want to see that leaves no one behind. Then, hear Nadine Naber, Hadiya Afzal, and Noor in conversation about co-optation of feminist messaging and continuing to practice curioisty and solidarity.

We chronically undervalue the invisible domestic tasks that women disproportionately own. Eve Rodsky took this imbalance head on by authoring “Fair Play” and creating the corresponding card deck. She shares how we often view women's time like sand, and men's like diamonds. Plus, she reveals insights from her latest research — relevant whether you're a parent, a partner, or just interested in playing a little bit more fair.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

We chronically undervalue the invisible domestic tasks that women disproportionately own. Eve Rodsky took this imbalance head on by authoring “Fair Play” and creating the corresponding card deck. She shares how we often view women's time like sand, and men's like diamonds. Plus, she reveals insights from her latest research — relevant whether you're a parent, a partner, or just interested in playing a little bit more fair.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

It's not hard to see that the feminist movement is taking over this nation with heartbreaking agendas and repercussions. Today I have the honor of having Jennifer Strickland on to talk about gender dysphoria, how it is the hour to speak up and protect our children, and how the gospel has the power to transform lives and bring freedom from sin and false identities. Jennifer emphasizes the need to implement and guard boundaries, protect children from harmful influences, and speak out against the lies of culture. I have no doubt that this episode will leave you passionately fired up with a hunger for Heavenly justice for the sake of our future, our children, and this nation. Connect with Jennifer: https://www.instagram.com/jenniferstrickland_author/ Get Your Copy of “I am A Woman”: https://urmore.org/iamawoman/ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Clerical Transgenderism: Women in Ministry and Feminism's Impact on the Church Originally published at the Center for Baptist Leadership This episode is a reading of my recent piece for the Center for Baptist Leadership, where I explore the recent controversy in women's Olympic boxing and what it reveals about egalitarianism and transgenderism. I also discuss how feminist ideologies have infiltrated the church, particularly in the area of women preaching. Highlighting the differences between masculine and feminine preaching styles, I argue for the importance of strong, masculine leadership in the church and the spiritual dangers of diluting these roles. Discover why biblical preaching is seen as a form of spiritual warfare and why it should be reserved for men. 00:00 Introduction to the Olympic Boxing Controversy 02:12 The Feminist Movement and Its Impact on Womanhood 02:38 Clerical Transgenderism: Women Preaching in the Church 03:04 Egalitarianism and Its Influence on Church Roles 04:18 Feminine-Coded Preaching and Its Consequences 07:31 The Call for Masculine Preaching 08:32 Conclusion: Upholding Biblical Preaching and Roles

Amber Picotta - God's Feminist Movement by Bill and Sandi Griffin

On this episode of The Hillsdale College Online Courses Podcast, Jeremiah and Juan discuss the far-reaching ramifications of the feminist movement before introducing Hillsdale College Politics professor Kevin Slack. American politics have drastically transformed over the last few decades as a ruling elite has emerged that, despite being from different parties, largely shares radical ideologies centered around identity politics. The change is not simply the natural conclusion of progressivism, but rather a series of radical movements that have provided new ideas and shifted the Left from the liberalism of Franklin Roosevelt to the Great Awokening of Barack Obama's second term.  The Feminist Movement is often depicted as the fight of the sisterhood against the patriarchy, but in reality, it was largely a movement of the elites, both men and women, against the traditional middle-class mores regarding the family. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

On this episode of The Hillsdale College Online Courses Podcast, Jeremiah and Juan discuss the far-reaching ramifications of the feminist movement before introducing Hillsdale College Politics professor Kevin Slack. American politics have drastically transformed over the last few decades as a ruling elite has emerged that, despite being from different parties, largely shares radical ideologies centered around identity politics. The change is not simply the natural conclusion of progressivism, but rather a series of radical movements that have provided new ideas and shifted the Left from the liberalism of Franklin Roosevelt to the Great Awokening of Barack Obama's second term.  The Feminist Movement is often depicted as the fight of the sisterhood against the patriarchy, but in reality, it was largely a movement of the elites, both men and women, against the traditional middle-class mores regarding the family. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Does Excommunication work? It seems to have shut down both the Ordain Women movement and the Feminist Movement in 1993. What can people learn from these episodes to effect change in the LDS Church? Dr Margaret Toscano discusses lessons learned. Check out our conversation... https://youtu.be/8PydVPNg9jI Don't miss our other conversations about the Sept Six: https://gospeltangents.com/mormon_history/sept-six/ transcript to follow Copyright © 2024 Gospel Tangents All Rights Reserved Except for book reviews, no content may be reproduced without written permission transcript to follow Copyright © 2024 Gospel Tangents All Rights Reserved

We're just hours away from crowning the winner of the Eurovision Song Contest 2024. But one of the more controversial acts in its home country is not a firebrand pop princess but a middle aged couple singing under the moniker 'Nebulossa'. Their electro-pop anthem 'Zorra' has caused a stir in Spain as it attempts to reclaim the word ‘Vixen,' often used as a slur to mean something like ‘bitch' or ‘slut.' "'Zorra' is partly autobiographical; it reflects women's experiences of feeling marginalized and underestimated. Nebulossa's María "Mery" Bas told Wiwibloggs, 'We decided to craft this song as a form of therapy.'  The use of the word though (47 times throughout the 3-minute song), has even divided Spain's feminist movement, with some arguing it's a powerful reclamation of the word, while others say it's derogatory. 'The problem is that this song is going to represent the country, and it's going to say, Europe, hey, guys came to Spain because there is plenty of sex. And this sex is related to prostitution, wherein many women are being exploited,' Eva Neila Ausín of Spain's Feminist Movement of Madrid Group explained to the What Really Happened podcast. The Feminist Movement of Madrid caused controversy in Spain following a public row with Spain's main feminist movement, the 8M Commission, over its support for trans rights legislation.  With regards to Zorra, the debate has become so intense that even Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez weighed in. 'It seems to me that feminism is not only fair but also fun; this type of provocation necessarily has to come from culture,' he told Spain's La Sexta.  It hasn't fazed the band much. ‘The criticism has been minimal compared to the overwhelming positive reception we've received. Nebulossa's Mark Dasousa told us.  In this episode of “What Really Happened at Eurovision?” We delve into the story of how a middle aged couple from coastal Spain exposed an existential fracture in Spain's feminist movement and what it says about where the country is culturally today.  

Our guest is a feminist trailblazer who had an inside look at the feminist movement as it progressed from the 1960's on. Her insights and odes to those who made it possible for women to have virtual integration into all aspects of commerce, the arts and even sports, as we've seen, is a far cry … Read More Read More

[S07 E08] How Do We Change For A More Hopeful Egalitarian America? We need to add to the powerful emerging union movement and unite it with all of our progressive movements whether Climate Justice, Black Lives Matter, the Feminist Movement, or the Sexual Rights Movement. We need one big multifaceted union and a political party that expresses that unity. In solidarity. Learn more about CHH:  We make it a point to provide the show free of ads. Your contributions help keep this content free and accessible to all. If you would like to simply donate one time, you can do so by visiting us at http://www.democracyatwork.info/donate. Become a monthly donor: http://www.patreon.com/democracyatwork

From crime, to the illuminati, join your favourite online sisters as they deep dive into current trending topics such as the viral Tumelo interview clip and the 4B feminist movement.

A new MP3 sermon from Old Paths Baptist Church is now available on SermonAudio with the following details: Title: Independent Fundamental Baptist (IFB) Compromise: Feminism & Bible College Subtitle: Feminist Movement Speaker: Jason Cooley Broadcaster: Old Paths Baptist Church Event: Sunday Service Date: 3/25/2024 Length: 118 min.

A new MP3 sermon from Old Paths Baptist Church is now available on SermonAudio with the following details: Title: Independent Fundamental Baptist (IFB) Compromise: Feminism & Bible College Subtitle: Feminist Movement Speaker: Jason Cooley Broadcaster: Old Paths Baptist Church Event: Sunday Service Date: 3/25/2024 Length: 118 min.

“I don't want to stop even when I'm 100 years old…”In our first guest episode, hosts Elham and Marwa are joined by Dr. Farida Allaghi to explore her experiences and lessons learnt as an activist growing up in Tripoli, Libya. She also delves into the current realities for women in Libyan politics today. Dr. Farida Allaghi is a renowned Libyan human rights activist and advocate for democracy and social development with extensive expertise in civil society, women's rights, and youth empowerment.If you enjoyed this episode, please subscribe and leave us a review on Apple Podcasts, or wherever you listen. Follow us:Twitter: @LibyamatterspodFacebook: @LibyamattersInstagram: @libyamatterspodcastFind our hosts on Twitter @Elham_LFJL, @Marwa_LFJL, @Mae_LFJL and  @Marwa_Babd.This season of Libya Matters was produced by Damiri Media: @damiri.officialArtwork by Agata Nowicka: @pixelendo Libya Matters is brought to you by Lawyers for Justice in Libya (LFJL).  Visit our website.Subscribe to our mailing list.Support our work with a single or regular donation.

Witches; Predestination; Farming; Lebanon; Feminist Movement; Nuclear Freeze; Mexico's Debt; Treaty of the Sea; Religious Liberties with RJR

In this episode, host Tinatswe Mhaka talks with Rutendo Chabikwa about the role of academia in feminist movement building. What works? What doesn't? How can we transform academia to be safe? Follow the podcast on :  https://www.instagram.com/thefeministbarpodcast/?hl=en   

Is feminism a modern movement or have women always resisted control imposed on them by oppressors? What role did the queens and courtesans play in shaping Indian history? Why were they written out of history and how can we reclaim these lost stories? We answer these questions and more in this episode! For Week 3 of SparX's Indian History Month, we have Manu Pillai delving deep into the women figures of Indian history, often written out of mainstream narratives. About SparX Indian History Month:In January, we dive into India's history. In a four-part Series, we immerse ourselves in the complex net of human experiences that has shaped our world today. Manu Pillai, a best selling writer and one of India's leading voices on historical academia, joins us for an intimate and thought provoking conversation. For every history buff out there, you don't want to miss out on this!Chapters 00:00:00 - 00:00:50 - Coming Up00:00:50 - 00:01:02 - Opening Theme  00:01:02 - 00:05:34 - Where Are the Women in History?  00:05:34 - 00:07:48 - Women in the Mughal Era  00:07:48 - 00:08:40 - Source of Education for Women 00:08:40 - 00:16:42 - Stories of Feminine Resistance: Mirabai, Janabai, and More!  00:16:42 - 00:28:06 - Royal Women and Their Quest for Power00:28:06 - 00:32:30 - Iconic Women in Indian Politics - Vijaylakshmi Pandit, Rani of Jhansi and More!00:32:30 - 00:38:50 - The Feminist Movement and Devadasi Culture00:38:50 - 00:42:14 - Reason Behind India's Universal Suffrage 00:42:14 - 00:46:42 - Indira Gandhi's Rise to Power00:46:42 - 00:49:30 - How a Namboodiri Woman Fought the Charge of Adultery  00:49:30 - 00:53:17 - Daily Acts of Resistance00:53:17 - 00:56:44 - Why Were There So Many Lawyers in Pre-Independence Era India?00:56:44 - 00:59:52 - Indians in England: Cultural Assimilation, Health Issues, and More!  00:59:52 - 01:12:29 - Comical Anecdotes from History: Krishnadevaraya, Gauhar Jaan and More!01:12:29 - 01:16:34 - Repercussions of Colonisation: Interracial Relations01:16:34 - 01:17:52 - The Last Burmese King in Ratnagiri  01:17:52 - 01:19:47 - The Cambodian Pallava King, Nandivarman II, and Stories of Migration01:19:47 - 01:20:33 - Ending Comments  01:20:33 - 01:21:18 - Closing ThemeFollow us on Instagram: @sparxbymukeshbansal  Website: https://www.sparxbymukeshbansal.comYou can also listen to SparX on all audio platformsFasion | Outbreak | Courtesy EpidemicSound.com

After Dark with Hosts Rob & Andrew – Just as the door of opportunity was opening for women, along came progressive women to close it. The damage will be incalculable. Years of gains are now reduced. While this seems unreal, it isn't. It is a reality. Not that long ago, women were speaking about the sisterhood of women, with women supporting women in...

In this introspective podcast episode, I explore the deep layers of self-love, self-care, and self-awareness. Reflecting on my recent yoga experiences and encounters with insightful teachers, I explore the profound question from Poet Andrea Gibson: Is my attention on loving, or is it on who isn't loving me? I discuss the societal pressures around beauty and aging, acknowledging the fine line between self-care practices and self-love. Drawing from personal experiences and lessons, I invite listeners to consider the transformative power of cultivating self-love as a foundation for all other aspects of life.Key Takeaways:Attention on Love: Reflect on whether your focus is on love, solutions, and self-compassion, or on who isn't loving you or the problems, allowing for mindfulness in the present moment.Cultivating the Witness: Practice moving beyond thought, connecting with your essential self, the unflinching consciousness within you, fostering stability and self-awareness.Embracing Joy: Challenge the ability to experience natural joy without relying on external substances or circumstances, recognizing it as a profound aspect of self-discovery.Self-Care vs. Self-Love: Question the intention behind self-care practices, discerning if they stem from a place of self-love or societal pressures, emphasizing the importance of self-love as the foundation of well-being.Starting with Self-Love: Prioritize self-love as a prerequisite for happiness and contentment, understanding that external changes or practices might enhance but not replace the core of self-acceptance and love.I mention the episode of Elena Brower's podcast with Andrea. Please take a listen here.Ready to reconnect with your self and not need a vacation from your vacation? Join us in Mexico for a full embodied, awake Women's retreat! Being in a conscious community of like minded Women to support your vision. Learn more here and reach out with any questions. Thank you for following the show! Please rate, review and share! When you do, send me a screen shot and I will send you a guided audio meditation to calm any urge or emotion. Get the free on demand training to end alcohol overwhelm.

Explore consistency through the lens of mindful living and intentional choices. In this episode, I invite you to dive into the transformative power of being consistent in our actions and decisions. As the seasons change, our senses awaken, allowing us to be fully present in the moment. I share insights on the profound impact of mindfulness, sensory experiences, and creative activities in our lives. We explore the joy of embracing consistent habits, breaking free from the cycle of alcohol, and making decisions from our future selves. Personal consistency and prioritizing values. Prioritizing self-care and consistency for a more peaceful life.Podcasting and perfectionism.The benefits of consistency and self-care.Consistency and integrity in personal growth. Join Nura Rachelle and I for a week of empowering magic to bring your next chapter to life by harnessing the transformative energy of the full solar eclipse, the power of sisterhood, embodiment practices, ceremony, pleasure and the elements of nature. Early bird pricing through October 31st 2023! Reserve your spot and learn more here. Thank you for following the show! Please rate, review and share! When you do, send me a screen shot and I will send you a guided audio meditation to calm any urge or emotion. Get the free on demand training to end alcohol overwhelm.

Today's episode is a personal story on how I reclaimed my wholeness and my journey to find that elusive something that always felt out of reach.  Although each of our journeys are unique, it is always a quest of forgetting and remembering that brings us back home to the truth of who we are. Share with someone this may help today. Breaking free from alcohol and finding meaning. Feminism, spirituality, and personal growth.Addiction, self-discovery, and motherhood. Personal growth, self-awareness, and letting go of alcohol. Intuitive drinking and self-awareness. October 15 at 10am PST - Register HEREJoin Nura Rachelle and I for our upcoming sacred circle event, as we dive into some Full Body Listening. It's a time to increase our capacity to hold the nuance of polarity, like the polarities that keep us in fear or limited in our conditioning. Together, we will focus on together in this free live event, sharing tools around how to move through these fears.Thank you for following, rate, review and share! When you do, send me a screen shot and I will send you a guided audio meditation to calm any urge or emotion. Send in your questions to be answered on the show! Have a story to share about how the podcast has supported your journey? Email Mary@marywagstaffcoach.comStop obsessing about alcohol without willpower, moderation or missing out! Get the proven strategy, accountability and support you deserve....Register for private coaching with Mary today!

https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLXUFLW8t2snuMXbB2x5iZDFMwOprh7x9a&si=5PH1jH5XyLhazDNl sound is consciousness... #2023 #art #music #movies #poetry #poem #food #photooftheday #volcano #news #weather #monkeys #climate #horse #puppy #fyp #love #instagood #onelove #eyes #getyoked #horsie #gotmilk #book #shecomin #getready 

'STUFF MOM NEVER TOLD YOU' is the name of the book & podcast by Anney Reese & Samantha McVey:about the Feminist Past, Present, and Future.  They explore the history, strategy, and emotion that went into several milestones & issues of the recent feminist movement-'Battle of the Sexes' Billie Jean King vs Bobby Riggs -it was 1973, held at the Houston Astrodome between 55-year-old Bobby Riggs and 29-year-old Billie Jean King.  Billie Jean won in three sets-The problems still linger today-Women being accepted in the workforce in the 70's-Women could not get a line of credit in the 70's-Women and suits they wear to work -Why is 'Feminism' a 'dirty' word-Television shows that changed the dynamic  

Welcome to my new Series "can you talk real quick?" This is a short, efficiently produced conversation with someone who knows stuff about things that are happening and who will let me record a quick chat to help us all better understand an issue in the news or our lives as well as connect with each other around something that might be unfolding in real time.  Please subscribe now for as little as 5$ and gain access to a community of over 700 awesome, curious, kind, funny, brilliant, generous souls   I WAS WRONG ABOUT TRIGGER WARNINGS Has the national obsession with trauma done real damage to teen girls? Jill Filipovic is a Brooklyn-based journalist, lawyer, and author of OK Boomer, Let's Talk: How My Generation Got Left Behind and The H-Spot: The Feminist Pursuit of Happiness. A weekly columnist for CNN and a 2019 New America Future of War fellow, she is also a contributing opinion writer to The New York Times and a former columnist for The Guardian. Her work has appeared in Time, The Washington Post, Vanity Fair, Foreign Policy, Politico, Marie Claire, Cosmopolitan, and many others. She contributed essays to the anthologies Nasty Women: Feminism, Resistance and Revolution in Trump's America and Yes Means Yes: Visions of Female Sexual Power and a World Without Rape. Jill was a 2019 International Women's Media Foundation fellow, and her Politico story on reproductive rights in Honduras was shortlisted for a One World Media Award. She is also a winner of a 2014 Newswomen's Club of New York Front Page Award for her global health reporting, two Society of Professional Journalists Sigma Delta Chi award for political commentary, and a Maggie award for reproductive health reporting. She was 2018 European Journalism Center grantee, a UN Foundation Fellow in Malawi and Indonesia, and an International Reporting Project fellow in Brazil and India. Subscribe to her substack jill.substack.com Follow her on Twitter and Instagram at @JillFilipovic Listen to her new podcast Pete on YouTube Check out all things Jon Carroll Follow and Support Pete Coe Pete on Twitter Pete On Instagram Pete Personal FB page Stand Up with Pete FB page

Berry Dilley's areas of interest cover movement, dance and mindfulness, teaching,creativity, as well as health, disability services, and quality of life for elders. She hasdegrees in dance, sociology and counseling and more recently trained in SomaticExperiencing to help people who have experienced trauma.Berry grew up on the east coast and moved, with her son, Steve, to Athens, Ohio, in1971, to teach in the theater department at Ohio University. She remarried and madeAthens her home.The 1970s was the time of the Feminist Movement, the EEOC and Title 9. Berry andseveral other young women in Athens joined the movement and founded their owngroup, Feminists and Faith, which has been active for about 45 years now."There's a tendency to have friends who are the same age. It's important tocultivate friendships with younger people who bring excitement, vitality, and newperspectives." - Berry DilleyIn the late 1990s Berry became acutely aware of the needs of those with disabilities,learning first hand while caring for family members. In 2002 she went to the mayorabout making the city more accessible. In 2004, the Athens City Commission onDisabilities was created.Now as Berry is aging, she is more aware of what older people need and want. Shejoined a community group which is now focused on becoming AARP Age FriendlyAthens County. Because of her membership with this group, Berry began visitingcommunities, new to her in Athens County and meeting people whose life experiencesare very different from hers to discover what their needs and wants are, oftenquitedifferent from hers. A common issue seems to be having someone to oversee one'scare when needed.The biggest issue Berry faces is who will be her 24/7.

The English Romantic poet Percy Shelley, who died in 1822 at age 29, played a significant role in developing the ideas of the feminist movement, author Carrie Gress says.   Ideas of the “the occult, smashing the patriarchy, and free love” played a significant role in Shelley's writing and ideology, says Gress, author of the new […]

The English Romantic poet Percy Shelley, who died in 1822 at age 29, played a significant role in developing the ideas of the feminist movement, author Carrie Gress says. Ideas of the “the occult, smashing the patriarchy, and free love” played a significant role in Shelley's writing and ideology, says Gress, author of the new book “The End of Woman: How Smashing the Patriarchy Has Destroyed Us.”Shelley was a “barbaric man” who was “involved in the occult,” Gress says. His wife was Mary Shelley, author of the 1818 novel “Frankenstein,” she notes, and Shelley drew on the ideas of her parents—a vision of a “women's revolution where there's no monogamy, there's no marriage, all of these things are just erased, and people just live this bucolic life without any reference to their human nature.” Shelley's ideology contributed to the modern feminist movement, a movement that has led to what Gress calls “The End of Woman.”Gress, also a fellow at the Washington-based Ethics and Public Policy Center, joins the show to discuss the history of feminism and explain how the feminist movement has harmed women and left women unfulfilled.Enjoy the show! Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In this week's episode, Raquel and Jennifer speak with union organizer, activist, and author Jon Melrod. In his book Fighting Times: Organizing on the Front Lines of the Class War, Jon chronicles his life and experience as part of the Black Liberation Movement, the Labor Movement, and the Feminist Movement. This is conversation that reaches back to the past and applies lessons learned to situations in the present. Tune in!Where to find Jon Melrod:Website: www.jonathanmelrod.com Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/jonathanmelrod/Let Raquel and Jennifer know what you think about this and other episodes of Madness Cafe on IG @madnesscafepodcast or by email at madnesscafepodcast@gmail.com.And don't forget to rate and review the show wherever you listen!Thanks for listening and responding!

INTERVIEW: The English Romantic poet Percy Shelley, who died in 1822 at age 29, played a significant role in developing the ideas of the feminist movement, author Carrie Gress says. Ideas of the “the occult, smashing the patriarchy, and free love” played a significant role in Shelley's writing and ideology, says Gress, author of the new book “The End of Woman: How Smashing the Patriarchy Has Destroyed Us.”Shelley was a “barbaric man” who was “involved in the occult,” Gress says. His wife was Mary Shelley, author of the 1818 novel “Frankenstein,” she notes, and Shelley drew on the ideas of her parents—a vision of a “women's revolution where there's no monogamy, there's no marriage, all of these things are just erased, and people just live this bucolic life without any reference to their human nature.” Shelley's ideology contributed to the modern feminist movement, a movement that has led to what Gress calls “The End of Woman.”Gress, also a fellow at the Washington-based Ethics and Public Policy Center, joins “The Daily Signal Podcast” to discuss the history of feminism and explain how the feminist movement has harmed women and left women unfulfilled.Enjoy the show! Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

INTERVIEW: The English Romantic poet Percy Shelley, who died in 1822 at age 29, played a significant role in developing the ideas of the feminist movement, author Carrie Gress says. Ideas of the “the occult, smashing the patriarchy, and free love” played a significant role in Shelley's writing and ideology, says Gress, author of the new […]

The International Risk Podcast is a weekly podcast for senior executives, board members and risk advisors. In these podcasts, we speak with risk management specialists from around the world. Our host is Dominic Bowen, originally from Australia, is one of Europe's leading international risk specialists. Having spent the last 20 years successfully establishing large and complex operations in the world's highest risk areas and conflict zones, Dominic now joins you to speak with exciting guests from around the world to discuss risk.The International Risk Podcast – Reducing risk by increasing knowledgeFollow us on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and LinkedIn for all our great updates.In today's episode, we are joined by Hawon Jung. Jung is a journalist and author of ‘Flowers of Fire: The inside story of South Korea's Feminist Movement' which was released in March 2023. Together we will explore the current global trend of the rising anti-feminist movement by reviewing what is happening inside South Korea and the risks that women and young girls currently face in South Korean society.

What's wrong with masculinity? In this bonus episode of Refining Rhetoric, Robert interviews critically acclaimed author and speaker Nancy Pearcey about her new book The Toxic War on Masculinity: How Christianity Reconciles the Sexes. Nancy is the author of several bestselling books, including Love Thy Body, The Soul of Science, Saving Leonardo, Finding Truth, and Total Truth. She is also a professor and scholar in residence at Houston Christian University and has been hailed in The Economist as “America's pre-eminent evangelical Protestant female intellectual.” In this crucially important conversation, Nancy shares the research behind The Toxic War on Masculinity, examining the history of why modern culture is so hostile toward men, the Darwinian and Christian takes on masculinity, astonishing evidence that supports Christian evangelical men as the least likely to divorce or commit abuse, how the war on masculinity is affecting our culture at a large scale, and what men can practically do to stay involved with their families. This is an episode you won't want to miss! Show notes: refiningrhetoric.com/nancy-pearcey

----- PODCAST Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/hardly-initiated/id1599150650 Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/2uvZwOnV5DNzEKX4Y6PqBw Full episodes playlist: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLsek3Cb4W-2F2eNa9rTk-lvLxXZmHEVr7 SOCIAL Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/hardlyinitiated/ Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/hardlyinitiated

The Consul General's speech on the Papaflessas' dinner dance created strong reactions among women participants at the event by the Pammessinian Brotherhood of Melbourne on 25th of March. - Για «γκάφα» έκανε λόγο ο γενικός πρόξενος της Ελλάδας στη Μελβούρνη Εμμανουήλ Κακαβελάκης σχετικά με το σημείο ομιλίας του την 25η Μαρτίου στο οποίο ακούγεται να συνδέει το φεμινιστικό κίνημα και τα δικαιώματα των ζώων.

In this thought-provoking episode, Vivek Ramaswamy and Alec Lace, host of First Class Fatherhood, explore the escalating crisis of fatherlessness in America. They discuss Alec's background as a railroad mechanic, father, and advocate for fatherhood, and cover topics such as the stigma around stay-at-home parents and the impact of fatherlessness on society. The conversation delves into the consequences of this crisis on communities, the corruption in the family court system, and the potential solutions to address these issues. With powerful insights and personal anecdotes, Alec and Vivek shed light on the urgent need for change in the way society views and supports fathers. 00:07:10 - 25% of American families without a father00:07:40 - Fatherlessness triples since 1950s00:08:50 - 70% fatherlessness in African-American community00:09:52 - Fatherlessness rates in Hispanic and Caucasian communities00:10:03 - Asian American community's low fatherlessness rate00:10:45 - Prisons filled with young men from fatherless homes00:12:42 - Corruption in the family court system00:13:57 - Disparity in prison sentencing between men and women00:15:55 - Impact of the feminist movement on family values00:17:12 - Governor Ron DeSantis' fatherhood initiative bill00:20:42 - 85% of kids in juvenile detention from fatherless homes00:21:22 - Making fatherhood cool and promoting positive examples00:22:36 - Changing the mindset around starting a family00:23:46 - Rebuilding self-confidence in America through fatherhood00:25:35 - Importance of positive role models00:26:17 - Advice for single moms to find a father figure00:27:19 - Helping kids without fathers through mentoring and coaching00:29:48 - Addressing deadbeat dads and cultural shifts00:33:11 - Pro-life stance and interview with Father Frank Pavone00:38:22 - Connection between fatherlessness and sexualization of society

This week we are talking about the feminist movement. We talk about how you all define feminism and what the dictionary says. We dive into gender inequality experiences you've had and then discuss thoughts on the feminist movement seen on social media and the news. Is being a feminist really believe that girls rule and boys drool? Don't forget to follow us on Instagram @whatsyourthoughtpodcast Overseas by Vlad Gluschenko | https://soundcloud.com/vgl9 Music promoted by https://www.free-stock-music.com Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/deed.en_U

Hello from Jay's tradlife mancave! It's just us this week, dissecting all the ways our culture has gone too far. We begin with [0:20] a debrief of the most Asian (American?) Oscars ever. Then, updates [20:40] on feminism in South Korea and [40:38] the Stepford wives of TikTok.  In this episode, we ask: Are Asians now overrepresented in Hollywood?! What happens when electoral politics revolves around gender relations? Why doesn't anyone want to give birth in South Korea, despite myriad family supports? How much of the “tradwife” lifestyle movement is about aesthetics, as opposed to a particular politics? For more, see: * Anna Louie Sussman's article about the 4B movement in Korea* An interview with Hawon Jung, author of Flowers of Fire: The Inside Story of South Korea's Feminist Movement and What It Means for Women's Rights Worldwide* Zoe Hu on the tradlife movement and its “central hero,” the tradwifeAnd revisit these TTSG episodes: * "Everything Everywhere All At Once" deep dive * “Tár,” a film for the chattering class, with Vinson Cunningham* On Korean feminism—* Fantasies of progress on K-TV, with Jenny Wang Medina * A feminist(?) K-drama about abortion * Harper's, Boba Bros, Korean Feminism, and the NBA bubble If you're in NYC this Sunday, come to BAM for a screening of Bong Joon-ho's “Parasite,” with Q&A by Tammy! Info and tix here: https://www.bam.org/film/2023/parasiteThanks for listening. As always, you can subscribe on Patreon or Substack, follow us on Instagram, TikTok, and Twitter, and get in touch via email at timetosaygoodbyepod@gmail.com.  This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit goodbye.substack.com/subscribe

How should we describe the state of the global struggle for women's rights? It is surely impossible to make a single overarching assessment– even as battles are won on one front, major challenges remain – or emerge - on another. Yet if it is hard to generalize about progress, we can at least note that conditions are scarcely favourable. To pick only three global trends - authoritarian rule, identity-based exclusion and economic instability - none of these help advance women's freedoms. As International Women's Day 2023 approaches, we invite three feminist leaders to assess this moment in their respective fields. For a list of supplemental readings and additional information about this episode's content, visit https://strengthandsolidarity.org/podcasts/ Contact us at pod@strengthandsolidarity.org

Per Estee Willams Trad Wives is a lifestyle that is a return to a model of the family that was common in the 1950s: the husband goes out to work, and the wife stays home to do domestic work. Williams says trad wives aren't attempting to dismantle women's right to work but that this is a choice made by individual women who believe a wife's role is to be a homemaker. We linked with Julia of the Comic Peach Podcast to get her point of view on the Trad Wives trend Check out her dope pod @cosmicpeachpodcast linktr.ee/cosmicpeachpodcast

Guest: Joanna Scutts is the author of Hotbed: Bohemian Greenwich Village and the Secret Club that Sparked Modern Feminism. The post Heterodoxy: The Secret Club That Sparked The Feminist Movement appeared first on KPFA.

Guest Shilyh Warren was comfortable in college having uncomfortable conversations about inequality and gender and felt herself to be a bit of a ramble-rouser. She wasn't exactly sure what her path would be like but she wanted to emulate the activists who went out and made a difference in the world dismantling systems. Her first job after college was doing political organizing, where she realized how hard that work was and the pace of change didn't meet her expectations. After investigating a few more options, she decided to join a boyfriend's dream to travel and work in South America. A twist in that story that made her take a look at what her own dreams held, led her to a few different kinds of adventure. Ultimately the cultural pieces that she was learning on the road intersected with the life of the mind she'd loved cultivating in the classroom.In this episode, find out from Shilyh out how casting a critical eye and reflecting deeply can manifest in different kinds of activism…on Roads Taken with Leslie Jennings Rowley. About This Episode's GuestShilyh Warren is currently at the University of Texas, Dallas where she is Associate Professor of Visual and Performing Arts & Film Studies as well as Associate Dean of Graduate Studies in the School of Arts, Humanities, and Technology. Her research takes up debates in film history, feminist theory, documentary studies, and film theory. She and her writing, including her award-winning piece "Revolution is Another Climax," can be found @shelikeswhat on Twitter (if that's still a thing.) For another story centered on finding an outlet for gender-related activism in the arts and the academy, listen to ourepisode with Erika Meitner.Find more episodes at https://roadstakenshow.comExecutive Producer/Host: Leslie Jennings RowleyMusic: Brian BurrowsEmail the show at RoadsTakenShow@gmail.com